Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.

Any post-2Ls reading this thread willing to comment on decision between CSM and DPW if interest is in financial regulatory practice? (Dodd-Frank, Basel III?) DPW highlights this practice area on their website, hard to know re CSM. Also can't make head or tails of CSM's rotation system -- seems high-risk high-reward, while DPW seems more amorphous. Cravath potentially more "prestigious" (i.e., for exit opportunities down the road); DPW potentially has "nicer culture." Anyone else deciding between these two have any thoughts?

Not HLS, but I worked at a financial institution before law school and we used the DPW DF tracker which was widely known to be the industry standard. Obviously, this is not the same as actual client engagement, and maybe Cravath pulls equal weight when it comes to bespoke advising, but I'd go ahead and say that DPW is the real deal on this.

Any post-2Ls reading this thread willing to comment on decision between CSM and DPW if interest is in financial regulatory practice? (Dodd-Frank, Basel III?) DPW highlights this practice area on their website, hard to know re CSM. Also can't make head or tails of CSM's rotation system -- seems high-risk high-reward, while DPW seems more amorphous. Cravath potentially more "prestigious" (i.e., for exit opportunities down the road); DPW potentially has "nicer culture." Anyone else deciding between these two have any thoughts?

chose DPW over CSM for a related practice area last year. huge HLS class at both firms though (HLS was the largest class at both firms this summer) and the work/exit ops are largely interchangeable; it's really a culture and work assignment distinction.

Anonymous User wrote:chose DPW over CSM for a related practice area last year. huge HLS class at both firms though (HLS was the largest class at both firms this summer) and the work/exit ops are largely interchangeable; it's really a culture and work assignment distinction.

Do you think CSM associates tend to have to work more than DPW associates (both in summer and full-time) as a result of the rotation system? The theory is that b/c you're supervised closely by specific partners in your current rotation group, there's nowhere to hide: if that partner gives you an assignment, there's no saying you're too busy with other assignments. At DPW, alternatively, you can decline some work if you're legitimately busy with other work b/c the source of the assignments isn't as concentrated in a few people giving it to you. Or is this a case of over-thinking it?

As for culture, is it really that different? Are DPW people noticeably "nicer" or "more pleasant" than at CSM? Or is this a matter of what type of "nice" works for what type of person?

Any post-2Ls reading this thread willing to comment on decision between CSM and DPW if interest is in financial regulatory practice? (Dodd-Frank, Basel III?) DPW highlights this practice area on their website, hard to know re CSM. Also can't make head or tails of CSM's rotation system -- seems high-risk high-reward, while DPW seems more amorphous. Cravath potentially more "prestigious" (i.e., for exit opportunities down the road); DPW potentially has "nicer culture." Anyone else deciding between these two have any thoughts?

One of the banking partners at Cravath told me they don't really have a financial regulatory practice. Because of the complexity involved, regulatory practice is heavily driven by partners with lots of experience, which doesn't really work with the Cravath model.

Anonymous User wrote:chose DPW over CSM for a related practice area last year. huge HLS class at both firms though (HLS was the largest class at both firms this summer) and the work/exit ops are largely interchangeable; it's really a culture and work assignment distinction.

Do you think CSM associates tend to have to work more than DPW associates (both in summer and full-time) as a result of the rotation system? The theory is that b/c you're supervised closely by specific partners in your current rotation group, there's nowhere to hide: if that partner gives you an assignment, there's no saying you're too busy with other assignments. At DPW, alternatively, you can decline some work if you're legitimately busy with other work b/c the source of the assignments isn't as concentrated in a few people giving it to you. Or is this a case of over-thinking it?

As for culture, is it really that different? Are DPW people noticeably "nicer" or "more pleasant" than at CSM? Or is this a matter of what type of "nice" works for what type of person?

I wouldn't look at it as where you're going to get more work overall. Both firms will be a tremendous amount of hours and work. You will probably have a little more flexibility at Davis Polk though (since you can shift work between multiple people and can actually say you're busy), and part of the culture is to make some effort to avoid fucking you over, or at least apologize when they do and recognize it, as opposed to CSM. That being said, I think both firms have nice people. You're just more likely to get receive sympathy at one, and more likely to get chewed out at the other.

Here though, re: financial regulatory, it seems like Davis Polk just has the stronger practice hands down. In other areas, like litigation, it's a toss-up and the culture factors play a huge role. And in some areas, like public M&A, Cravath has the more notable group.

Any post-2Ls reading this thread willing to comment on decision between CSM and DPW if interest is in financial regulatory practice? (Dodd-Frank, Basel III?) DPW highlights this practice area on their website, hard to know re CSM. Also can't make head or tails of CSM's rotation system -- seems high-risk high-reward, while DPW seems more amorphous. Cravath potentially more "prestigious" (i.e., for exit opportunities down the road); DPW potentially has "nicer culture." Anyone else deciding between these two have any thoughts?

One of the banking partners at Cravath told me they don't really have a financial regulatory practice. Because of the complexity involved, regulatory practice is heavily driven by partners with lots of experience, which doesn't really work with the Cravath model.

Anonymous User wrote:McKinsey Round 1 (post-IWIA) email just sent. It includes a full list of people moving on, for case practising purposes, so I think a rejection email will be sent shortly/has been sent.

Did you do the IWIA on Wed or Thurs? Can you PM me?

Will reply publicly just in case anyone is wondering: I did my IWIA on Weds, but I see people on the list that definitely did it on Thursday. Also, it looks like all-but-one of the people in my two breakout sessions made it, so it doesn't look like a super-selective stage (but small sample size caveat, etc.).

ETA: Actually, I just remembered a previous post that there were 15/15 2Ls/3Ls invited to last year's IWIA. This year's breakdown is 7/8 2Ls/3Ls past IWIA, which obviously makes it a ~50% cut if the invitation numbers held true.

Anonymous User wrote:ETA: Actually, I just remembered a previous post that there were 15/15 2Ls/3Ls invited to last year's IWIA. This year's breakdown is 7/8 2Ls/3Ls past IWIA, which obviously makes it a ~50% cut if the invitation numbers held true.

In a fit of overdoing the analysis: I counted out the number of HLS JDs at the IWIA session I was at, multiplied it by four, and divided that by the number of HLS JDs listed in the document they sent out. Without giving away which session I was in, I got ~2.

Any post-2Ls reading this thread willing to comment on decision between CSM and DPW if interest is in financial regulatory practice? (Dodd-Frank, Basel III?) DPW highlights this practice area on their website, hard to know re CSM. Also can't make head or tails of CSM's rotation system -- seems high-risk high-reward, while DPW seems more amorphous. Cravath potentially more "prestigious" (i.e., for exit opportunities down the road); DPW potentially has "nicer culture." Anyone else deciding between these two have any thoughts?

One of the banking partners at Cravath told me they don't really have a financial regulatory practice. Because of the complexity involved, regulatory practice is heavily driven by partners with lots of experience, which doesn't really work with the Cravath model.

Suppose I only intend to work at a firm (either CSM or DPW) for 2-3 years. Would it be fair to say, based on the above observation about the complexity involved with regulatory practice, that the presence or absence of this practice area at the firm shouldn't really affect my decision re which to go to? (On the theory that you'd only really do this kind of work well past your junior associate years.) Or can DPW associates "rotate" into this practice area early on?